Let's keep the poll clean(ish!)...

76 vs. 61 poll discussion HERE.

I'll start it off...

I wonder if anyone is SURPRISED at the results?

I wonder what the 76 nay-sayers will come up with next as a reason for no need for a 76? Probably they will say that SZ is NOT representative of the market. Of course, that begs the question 'where DO these so-called representative arranger users post if it ain't here...?'

AFAIK, this is the ONLY cross-platform arranger forum with any volume of posts, in English. SZ doesn't seem to be particularly 'pro' oriented (especially from most of what I've heard ), but even if it were, why would that make any difference to the need for a 76? PLENTY of 76 playing amateurs here...

Maybe the poll wasn't scientific enough? Of course, if the results had been overwhelmingly 61, the nay-sayers would point to THAT as proof positive. They can't have it BOTH ways...

Ketron do a great job of producing a 76 with the footprint of close to a 61 by moving the wheels to just ABOVE the keyboard on the LH side, and not using a floppy drive, so the whole 'too big' thing can be avoided by good design, and the 76 speaker-ed Roland E60 is a scant 3 lbs more than the S900 (and built like a tank), so that rules out the weight problem.

If Yamaha followed these guidelines, it would beg the question, why would anyone even USE a 61 if a 76 could be produced along these lines..? Especially for as little as 10-20% more in cost (the difference between an E50 and E60)

Me, I thought it would go along these lines (the poll). Question is, are Yamaha surprised (I KNOW they've read it!)?

We all know that everything to do with mid-TOTL arrangers is purely subjective. The members of SZ are very vocal about their likes and dislikes, for sure. Whether Yamaha decides to market a 73,76 or 88 key version of their PSR arrangers is strictly their business. They seem to be doing just fine with their marketing strategy as it is.

Would they sell more product if they offered an optional bigger keyboard? I would think so, but then again how many of the larger boards would be bought at the expense of the 61 board? Maybe they see the cross marketing of sizes as a no-win situation, who knows. Yamaha certainly offers arrangers in larger sizes - YPG, Clavinova, Disclavier.

I might be interested in a 73/76-key Yamaha, but for now I am satisfied with my E-60 and see no need to go with a 61 Yamaha product. My comfort level is at the 6-octave range. Yamaha will do as it pleases until/unless economics force a change.

The more telling discussion that would probably help manufacturers is
Would an arranger that has 76 keys just by that fact alone deter the 61ers from getting the arranger that have 76 keys?

I could see the 76ers saying that because a 61 key keyboard does not have enough keys, they would not buy it. Can the 61ers say that because a keyboard has 76 keys, they would not buy it. Are the 61ers saying that the extra keys distracts them or the extra keys confuses them.


I mean, if a computer can come with 3 USB ports or 4 USB ports, if you only want 3 would you necessarily reject having 4 because it is not 3?


The poll only goes to show that a manufacturer can only gain by having a 76 key arranger over a 61. What would they have to loose.

The ones who buy a 61 key arranger are not concerned with the keys but mainly the sounds, styles and OS. The one who don’t by a 61 key arranger but buy a 76 key one obviously keys are a major issue with them and as good as the sounds styles and OS are, the number of keys is a deal breaker. We can not say that about the 61ers.

I think one of the REAL questions Yamaha might ask themselves is, if they dominate the 61 note sales, what makes them think they WOULDN'T dominate 76 sales, too?

The thought that they would lose 61 sales if a 76 was available is ludicrous. A sale is a sale, and in all probability, the increased cost of a 76 would increase the profit, also. Win, win for Yamaha.

Remember, only Korg, Ketron and Roland stand to LOSE if Yamaha take this road, and last time I looked, competition is about burying your opponents if you get the chance! Give them the opportunity to thrive in an uncontested market, and you are only one competitor's innovation away from losing market dominance again (Yamaha weren't ALWAYS #1).

Me, I would welcome Yamaha's entry into this market, firstly, to give ME a bit more choice... I think if I were strictly solo OMB, a Yamaha 76 is what I would chose, simply for the guitars, and secondly, to give Roland a wake-up call to not sit on their bums and stagnate.

Competition is good for ALL of us...

Personally when I play ANY 61 keys I have to think more about where to play a part octave-wise....

Now I am NOT a trained player...very basic I might add....ONLY chords right hand with double bass notes on the left...

I've been shopping for a board for 3 months now and though I have $1800 I have YET to find an $1800 76 key I LOVE...

I considered the ROLAND E-60 but there just aren't a whole lot of people playing em which made me wonder.....Plus I think I really want a workstation vs. arranger at this time...and to add a drum machine later

The 61 key workstations YAMAHA XS 6...ROLAND x6 and the KORG M3 all leave me feeling short-changed key-wise....

Though I will probably end up with one of those cause my original budget was $1000 and its a miracle i have this now....

Generally it should only be about a $300 difference between 76 and 61 but there seems to be some discrepencies in my theory with some models...

I just like a little more room on the board thats all....I kinda regret returning my USED TRITON EXTREME 76 BUT THE PIANOS WERE A LITTLE WEAK....and it was a 4 year old unit & was afraid it would dump out on me...

BUT IT WAS 76 keys and for me I prefer it...but the reality is at $1800 I'm probaly gonna end up with a 61

So the quest continues

Steve Altonian
http://www.soundclick.com/stevealtonian

For me, I have become so accustomed to performing with 61 keys, and my little finger of my left hand touching the left edge of the keyboard that having 76 keys would now hamper my playing ability. Sure, I could eventually get used to having 76 keys, but it would take quite a while. 61 keys provides me with all the range I need for any instrument (voice) and I'm very comfortable with the key configuration.

One of the primary reasons I posted the poll was to allow forum members to post their preference without a lot of explanations--just a number says it all.

I sincerely believe that if Yamaha produced a 76 key arranger they would pick up a few sales, but die-hard Korg, Roland, Gem and other fans would not switch for any reason--61, 76 or even 88 keys. Keep in mind that at least one forum member kept his old G-1000 so long that it grew mold and took on an alien life form. Some folks will not change brands, no matter what.

The poll has been very interesting, and in addition to showing that the split is still about 50/50 it also portrays the number of active members here. Granted, it does not show the number of lurkers that never post anything at all, but it seems to be representative of the number of pros that frequent the Synthzone's General Arranger Keyboard Forum. And, as a percentage of the total keyboard sales, I suspect it's a tiny fraction of the total market.

Thanks everyone for participating,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

I am most comfortable with 88 keys. 76 keys would be as much of a trade-off as I would consider, I'm not interested in the least in 61 key keyboards unless I midi-ed them to an 88 key controller.

I know I'm in the minority but thought I'd throw my opinion in for good measure.

I have played 61-note boards for many years, with occasional 76-ers (Roland G800, Ketron SD1, Roland G70). I do fine with 61, but I find myself switching Octaves a lot on piano. All things considered, I would prefer 76.
DonM

Here’s something for you to puzzle over:

The Wersi Abacus has 61 notes, onboard speakers, 8.4” touch screen, Drawbars, Floppy, DVD/CD Burner and USB 2, it is also very heavy (Transportable rather then portable)

The Wersi Ikarus has 76 notes, onboard speakers, 8.4” adjustable touch screen, Sliders, Floppy, DVD/CD Burner and USB 2, however it weighs only a fraction more then a Roland G 70, is no bigger then an Abacus (The height is actually less) and costs a 1/3 less.

Sort of blows the theory that a 76 note board is more expensive to make and has a weight penalty.

BTW The Abacus comes from the Organ line, whereas the Ikarus comes from the Keyboard line. (In case you were wondering)

Bill

It is is easy for the "armchair keyboard designers" to say how simple(and inexpensive)it is for Yamaha to make a 76 note arranger...but talk is cheap unless they have solid information, like facts and figures, to back it up.

I think Yamaha is wise not to wade into the murky waters of a 76 note arranger production unless the market actually shows that these instruments will turn a good profit.

The members of SZ probably represent a tiny fraction of the overall keyboard market as Gary has pointed out, and many of the members would not buy a Yamaha no matter how many keys it had...brand loyalty is strong with quite a few forumites.

I want a compact and light arranger so 61 keys are perfect for my needs, and Yamaha seems to think this way as well.

It does not make good business sense to "dominate" an unsuccessful or barely thriving market, and if the very poor sales of Roland's G70 and E-60 are any indication of what to expect, then Yamaha has wisely decided to tread on the side of caution.

Maybe Korg's PA2Xpro will do well and give a proper indication that there is a viable market for a 76 note arranger, but I have my suspicions that the sales will be mediocre at best.

Yamaha is the industry leader for a reason....wise and careful decisions based on fact, not conjecture, or, least of all, the results of a forum poll.

Ian

Ian.The problem is that yamaha is driven by sound business principles and not wishful thinking synthzoners. There is simply not enough demand to support yamaha diversiifying an already highly successful product. Demand must translate into profit. Would yamaha derive extra profit by producing a 76 key keyboard ? I dont think so. The arranger market is a small niche market, those players that want a 76 keyboard is a fraction of that niche, those 76 keyboard champions that would play a yamaha keyboard is a fraction of that fraction of that niche....those players that would buy a yamaha 76 instead of a yamaha 61 will cannabalise the sales of the 61 not increase it or are people sugseting here that yamaha drop their most successful aranger product in place of the 76 key experiment ??? That would be a smart business move right ??????. Remember profit is the motive and rightfully so.The tyros brand is doing incredibly well. It would take a very gungho product manager to mess with that formula. It was tried before with the psr 9000 pro. That sold loads didnt it ????? or did it ???? Give yamaha a good business reason to make a 76 keybaord version and they will. It is really that simple.

[This message has been edited by Spalding 4 (edited 03-27-2008).]

Just a question...if 76 notes are so popular, and the G70 and E-60 are so great(according to you and Fran, at least) why are the sales for these instruments so appalling?

The dealers I work with tell me the G70 has been a very poor seller, and the E-60 is even worse.

That doesn't seem like 76'ers are a runaway success in the Roland camp.

Blame it on Roland's marketing if you wish, but Roland's G70 and E-60 are marketed differently here in Canada and are sold alongside Tyros2 and S900 and according to my sources, i.e. salespeople and dealers, Yamaha outsells them both by a very wide margin.

Your argument doesn't hold any water, Diki...there's a big hole in your bucket.

Yamaha is clearly smart enough to avoid trying to dominate a market that is far from proven.

Ian

I agree completely, Spalding, you make good sense...wishful thinking doesn't put money in the coffers.

Well, I'm off on a Yamaha road trip...I'll check in when I get to my hotel and see how this debate is fairing out....should be interesting.

Ian

Here is what I find amazing comparing a 61 key keyboard with a 76 key keyboard:

The Yamaha Tyros 2 weighs in at 32 lbs without a hard disk. The Korg Pa2xpro with 76 keys weighs in at 39.68 lbs with a hard disk and a motorized display. A 5 lb difference. Both keyboards very lightweight considering the features they pack.

In the size category the Tyros is 44.8 inches wide while the Pa2xpro is 47.52 inches wide. A little under 2.5 inches difference between a 61 key keyboard and a 76 key keyboard. Don't forget the Korg has two keys and a Joystick placed in the same location as the Tyros 2!

The Pa2xpro is an amazing 14.37 inches deep compared to the Huge 17.7 inches of the Tyros 2.

Bottom line is that Korg has found a way to stuff a 76 keybed in a workstation without adding large amounts of size and weight.

Even if we were to take your word that Yamaha T2 and PSR 900 (61 keys) outsells Roland G70 and E 60 (76 keys) it is a flawed argument to make that 76 keys do not sell.


Look we all know that it is not the keybed, keyfeel or number of keys that sell the Yamaha arrangers it is sounds, styles and OS. And apparently, a number of people prefer Yamaha to Roland, Korg and Ketron.

The reason why Yamaha refuses to listen to its customers is because of the unsuccessful of 9000 pro. But the problem with the 9000 was not the 76 keys but the glitches in the OS that it was oversized and over weight. Their refusal to make a 76 key arranger has nothing to do about Yamaha thinking a 76 key arranger would not sell as much as the 61 key arranger.


If the Roland G70 had the same size and weight as the T2 and had 61 keys, are you telling me that Roland would be the same as a T2 in terms of sales.
If when the T2 was unveiled with the innovative SA voices and styles, it was 76 keys in stead of 61 keys are you telling me that the T2 would not have sold as much as it did?

Its all about sounds styles and OS.

As Yamaha has proven with the PSR 900 and T2, undesirable looks of the keyboard, a poorly built body and keyfeel and keybed does not decrease sales as long as the sounds, styles and OS are the best.

So it begs the question, what are they afraid of with 76 keys?

When the New T3 comes out a TOTL 76 key Yamaha arranger will be forgotten into all the the hype we will have to endure, people are Salivating for a new TYROS 3......
Great Sounds & Styles Trumps all else.
Even if Yamaha considers 76 in the future it will be Years away if at all.

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 03-27-2008).]

With respect thats a back to front argument. The correct question is why should Yamaha make a 76 key keyboard ? What is the profit motive ? What are the threats to their profits if they dont ? What are the threats to their profit if they do ?

Until you can provide a business argument to address these four basic questions then everything else is wishfull thinking. It doesnt matter what yamaha "could do ". doesnt matter if they could move the modulation wheels anywhere else, make the keyboard lighter etc. Why should they do it in terms that they understand i.e profit?

Then they will listen.

Comparing Korg to the tyros makes no sense. Even if i prefered 76 keys i would still have bought the Korg over the Tyros because the korg is a fully featured arranger workstation sampler synth !!! People who buy the PA range are much more into creation and experimentation. Korg know their product market and differntiate their products accordingly. Yamaha know their customers and differentiate their products accordingly.

If the PSR900pro failed simply because of a buggy operating system then they would have produced a revised OS updates as they have with every bugged out keyboard they ever produced just like korg are having to do with the PA2X and the PA1x pro before it but it would not have stopped them from producinganother 76 keyboard would it ? They would not have dropped the keys just for that !!! Thats like saying the number of keys affected the operating System so if we drop the keys we will sell more bugged out boards !! Anyway i am just playing with you.

lets stick to the one discussion. Will 76 Keys on a yamaha T2 Sell more T2s and increase yamahas profits relative to the potential to loss of sales .

On a lighter note. I would love to see yamaha produce a 76 note keyboardf just to make everyone happy and focus on making music !


[This message has been edited by Spalding 4 (edited 03-27-2008).]

Why doesn't Steve Demming who is most likely reading all this stuff along with many other Yamaha team associates....relay the 76 POLL & thoughts info to Yamaha R&D or whomever is the High Archy in the Yammy Arranger KB decision Design team. Maybe they could provide a definitive answer to settle all this 76 wish-listing.

Couple of points here...firstly it depends on what instrument you learnt to play on..if you played piano the 76/88 is a must, if you played organ then 61 is acceptable, remember the worlds most fantasic pipe organs have only 61 or 56 note keyboards.
When Laurens Hammond started manufacturing the Tonewheel organ he only put a 25 note pedal boards on them, not a full size 32 note board...why? because he found that most players found 25 pedals were enough and the extra cost of putting a full pedal board on was not commercially viable. (The RT3 was produced in smaller quantities to satify the need for full padel boards)

I must admit I am begining to hate the number 76, I see it see so much on this forum being bandied around....61 notes are here to stay...get used to it or buy a separate 76 note Midi controller to satify your 76 note addiction.

Pasa

Pasa nice post....

I also feel when the Yamaha SA voice era Hysteria subsides people who think they need 76 keys will simply realize
THERE ARE "OTHER" GREAT CHOICES besides Yamaha to choose from that can certainly without a doubt satisfy their Musical Arranger Needs for sure.

What frustrates me with 61 keys is trying to do an arpeggio or a Glissando with the left hand Synchro turned on. You can't do it!! If you have a song like; I will Survive that has an Arpeggio beginning, you just cant do it with 61 keys without using the Octave button and losing a hand.

[This message has been edited by kbrkr (edited 03-27-2008).]

I'm a converted organ player, so I'm used the 61 note boards, but as stated early on I have problems with hand placement for some piano work. Often I find that I need to transpose an octave down to keep the sound in range and my hands from playing too low on the keyboard.

I simply like a larger keyboard as long as the size and weight are not prohibitive. As for piano-style square keys and weighting, that's another discussion altogether.

I performed professionally for many years without any problems using 41 keys.

The Accordion / Cordovox

Jerry

If they made the exact same board in both 61 and one 76, like the workstations I still wouldn't care unless there was a big price difference.
Meaning I'd take whatever they had on the floor unless ,like I said, price were a big factor.

Firstly, let me point out that the organ has 122 keys (two manuals). Don't try to tell me you never used the second manual...

I am still stunned at the apologia for Yamaha in the face of overwhelming support for the need for a 76 in Yamaha's product line up. Some of these arguments are so post hoc ergo propter hoc it isn't even funny! You are taking the end result, and using it as the cause...

Yamaha don't make a 76, therefore, Yamaha SHOULDN'T make a 76. That bucket doesn't even have a bottom.

Nor is comparison to a G70, which is a totally different arranger. If Ford make a BAD SUV, Chrysler shouldn't make one either, because it might be bad too? Not much confidence in your brand/religion, there, Ian...

But the clincher is, Yamaha DID make a 76. Therefore any argument is moot. They saw the need for one and tried to fill it. But the fact that it was a total disaster had NOTHING to do with how many keys it had. It was a disaster because the OS was a shambles, and it was put into production FAR too early (sound familiar? ). It was a loss of face that still has not been recovered from, because the NEED for the product hasn't changed, only the willingness to get back on the horse has changed.

It seems Yamaha haven't got much stomach for acknowledging where the TRUE culprit in the 9000Pro debacle came from. It was a 76, our other, more successful arrangers are 61-ers, therefore the 9000Pro's failure MUST have been due to that. It couldn't POSSIBLY be that WE screwed the OS up. Not us. We're YAMAHA, damnit!

And, once again, I remind you all that, were Yamaha to actually make a 76, Ian would be one of it's greatest cheerleaders. I guarantee he would not be shooting it down in flames as a bad idea. It's only a bad idea because Yamaha don't actually make one!

If Yamaha do it... it's good. If they don't... it's bad...

Baaaaaah....!

Interesting discussion, but so far I did not see the most important reason to choose for 76 keys instead of 61.
We are talking arranger keyboards!

So if brought back to the basic funtion of the arranger keyboard, left hand acc and right hand melodyline, fils etc...

It all depends how are you playing your left hand acc!

one finger or full chords!

To get most out of it you use full chords.

So 76 keys at least, since you need 2,5 octaves to bring in all the nuances.

So is it correct to say that the 61keys players don't play full chords, but one finger only...?

I am aware that this last sentence will steam up some but hey who cares...

Fred

'It seems Yamaha haven't got much stomach for acknowledging where the TRUE culprit in the 9000Pro debacle came from. It was a 76, our other, more successful arrangers are 61-ers, therefore the 9000Pro's failure MUST have been due to that. It couldn't POSSIBLY be that WE screwed the OS up. Not us. We're YAMAHA, damnit!'

Do you actually believe what you type Diki ?? Are you seriously saying that yamaha did not put out another 76 key arranger purely because they produced a bugged out 76 keyboard before ???? do they believe that having those ectra keys might jinx the Operating system ??? Are you saying yamaha are too proud despite the gazzillions extra YOU think they would make in profit to just put out an EXACT COPY of the highly successful T1 or T2 ??? I mean there would be no bug issues to simply put out a 76 key replica of what already exists right ???

How naieve of the men in suits at yamaha !!!They should all be fired and i would totally agree with you but for the fact that they have the most successful arranger keyboard on the planet....That redeems their idiotic illogical stance somewhat....

If only marketing , productions and sales were as simple to do PROFITABLY as you appear to think it is Diki. Like i said i would love for yamaha to make a 76key keyboard just for you and the same for me with a built in genuine sampler ,sequencer and synth editor but for some strange reason yamaha are not likely to do it. Maybe people like you and me are not in yamaha's target market. Maybe , just maybe yamaha aim their arranger products at the home market, where 61 keys fits just right and samplers are not really priority, sound editing and sequencing are nice extras but not really necessary but great styles and CD quality sounds are....Wait a minute !!! doesnt that sound like a great idea !! Why dont Yamaha make a product just like that...oh darn it i just remebered something mate. THEY ALREADY HAVE.

I hope you know i am just sparring with you Diki . I genuinely respect your viewpoint on most topics but on this one your tunnel visioned.

[This message has been edited by spalding (edited 03-27-2008).]

If you use chord inversions all chords with the left hand can be played within 1 octave

Bill

Inversions? I need transfers 4th-5th-6th-9th etc...smoothly...between full range of
chords
There's no way you can accomplish that without having octopus hands en fingers within one octave.
By the way you should read 2 octaves instead of 2,5..

Fred

Correct but incorrect...there are not 122 note all sounding the same....duh theres always some trying to be clever !

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Diki:
[B]Firstly, let me point out that the organ has 122 keys (two manuals). Don't try to tell me you never used the second manual...

Al ... I realize that the example you gave may have been just that, for discussion purposes ... but my technics kn6000 has "Panel Memory" buttons that allow me to set certain registrations for various songs and save them ... If I need the full kb for something, especially in the beginning of a tune I can set a Panel Memory for that, play what I need to play and then by pressing one PM button I go to whatever other 'set up' I need ... Does whatever board you are playing have something similar?
t.

Tony,

Yes the Pa2xpro has Performances which I can setup up the keyboard. But there are many other piano pieces that you can't play on 61 keys and sound right.

Al,

Have you every tried doing a Glissando using the Full fingering mode of a 61 key keyboard--it works just fine. It's just a matter of setting the fingering mode to full, which allows the full width of the keyboard to be used.

Cheers,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

Hi,
if I was a die hard yamaha fan, just because they only have 61 keys wouldn't put me off. I was a technics user for many years, only had 61 keys also.
I use full chords & pianist mode. I also have 61, 76, & 88note keyboards ( 88 notes is my piano, to which I midi my keyboards or my laptop/omb arranger software) if I want the full piano experience haahaa. Mines only for home use so using a piano as a controller isn't a hassle.

Personally, bring back arranger modules, only they obviously weren't popular either.

best wishes
Rikki

I am left wondering what government is subsidizing Roland, Korg and Ketron (MS too), who apparently seem to be able to survive in business despite making the FATAL flaw of offering arrangers in other than 61 note sizes..?

Surely they CAN'T be making a profit?

This is what drives me crazy. The 'apologists' somehow seem to be able to ignore the fact that every other arranger manufacturer OTHER than Yamaha make a 76 as well as 61's. And I'm pretty sure that they would also be the first to say that the main reason that Yamaha's dominate the market is NOT that they don't have a 76 in their lineup. In fact, ask any number of Yamaha user why Yamaha are THEIR choice, and you will get almost as many answers. And not ONE of them will be 'because they don't make a 76'..

Sorry, but the only tunnel I see around here are loyalists defending Yamaha in denial of the facts. You've got to at least offer a reason that actually fits the facts. We all swim in the same ocean... If other companies can produce 76's without going belly up, then so can Yamaha. I KNOW you are not trying to tell us that Yamaha are to 'weak', 'timid' or 'uncaring'...

I'm a pianist but I like the Yamaha arrangers therefore I've got a 3000 with 61 keys. I'd love a 76 key version but that's life.

Nevertheless I don't see that it would cost Yamaha a huge amount to use an NP30 or DGX keybed with PSR 900 electronics; as someone has pointed out in a previous thread the Yamaha CVP "ensemble piano" range are arranger electronics with a piano.

I suppose I have to agree with the "if there was a big enough market they'd make one" theory.

Maybe what we need is a DGX 520 "pro"!

Here is the problem with the point the Yamaha apologist are making.

They say that Yamaha has “the most successful arranger keyboard on the planet”.
We can assume that they are talking about the T2.
Well, if that were the case, then there is no need for the T3.
Why mess with success. Even worst, the changes Yamaha are probably going to make with the T3 is going to be to the Sounds, Styles and he OS. Ironically, those are the selling points for the T2 and for the T2 success. So why would Yamaha take a chance and make changes to that winning formula?

Yamaha is taking a very big business risk by making changes to the Sounds, Styles and OS of the T2 and making a T3. Where as it relates to a 76 key T3, there is no risk to Yamaha because people do not buy the Tyros series for the number of keys so an extra 15 keys would not prevent them from buying. Yamaha can only gain from having a 76 key T3 because the persons who would not buy a 61 key T3 would buy a 76 key T3.

What company would not create a product that would present no or very limited risk (any new product would always have some risk) but creates a product that changes the very core of their product?

O I forgot we no the answer to that; YAMAHA.


[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 03-28-2008).]

Still full of holes Diki...you forgot to factor in the amount of profit...the margin...and it's a very imortant part of this situation.

The G70 and E-60 have been sales duds here in Canada...and from what I understand, they haven't been exactly jumping off the shelves elsewhere, either.

That should be warning enough.

Since you and a few others have been saying how wonderful these instruments are, the reason they aren't selling is because they have 76 keys.

OR...perhaps they aren't really all that they are cracked up to be....which is it?

You sure have a tough time grasping reality....a company does not get in a market that THEY (not you, they have much wiser marketing gurus)do not feel will bring them a decent profit.

I think you are just perpetuating this thread solely for your own amusment...you can't possibly be THAT narrow minded.

Ian

posted 03-28-2008 03:11 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Here is the problem with the point the Yamaha apologist are making.
They say that Yamaha has “the most successful arranger keyboard on the planet”.
We can assume that they are talking about the T2.
Well, if that were the case, then there is no need for the T3.
Why mess with success. Even worst, the changes Yamaha are probably going to make with the T3 is going to be to the Sounds, Styles and he OS. Ironically, those are the selling points for the T2 and for the T2 success. So why would Yamaha take a chance and make changes to that winning formula?"

Your gonna love this answer Genesys ! The motive to make the T3 is ......wait for it....Profit !!!!

Heres how the magic works. You make a keyboard , you sell it to avid loyal customers. you wait a couple of years until the sales cycle has matured and your sales are saturated i.e slowed right down to a trickle, you repackage the same keyboard with a few extra lights and switches, you sell it as an upgrade and your market ( Who largely never got to grips with the technology of the first keyboard) sell their ~"old" keyboard and buy a brand spanking new one TOTL one (Which in fact was their old keyboard dressed up a bit !

Now tell me thats not bloody genius !!!

But that just the theory. does it work in practise ?

Korg pa1x to korg pa800
Korg Pa1xpro to Korg Pa2x

Yamaha Tyros 1 to yamaha tyros 2

Roland G70 to Roland G80

Seems like this idea is catching on !!!

But are people really fooled into buying the same instrument repackaged again ? surely it cant be that simple ???? Ask some of the members on this board who have multilpe purchases of repackaged keyboards and "up graded" with virtualy no change in keyboard functionality just a few new sounds and still dont understand the instrument that they have bought...

I have probably said too much. now the secrets out we will all start making keyboards and some of the smarter ones here will clean up with a 76 key version....or will they ?

You tell me ..........

last bit

Yamaha spend thousands of punds/dollars/yen on R&D , they came up with the highly techoological advance of SA voices. Thats brilliant. They also thought about continuing to bolt on speakers to the keyvoard that to a pro user is next to useless and risks being broken if set up and broken down regularly (funny thing is it works quite well for a home user who has the instrument permanantly set up ) and for the finishing touch they shaved off some of the edges to give it that space age stealth bomber highly "technical" look whilst the inner workings of the instrument remain largely the same as the T1. But with all that RD budget blown they missed a trick didnt they . I know what you are thinking....76 KEYS !!! Its just soooo obvious !!

Please dont take offence at my heavy sarcasm. Its English humour and meant to be light hearted

[This message has been edited by Spalding 4 (edited 03-28-2008).]

[This message has been edited by Spalding 4 (edited 03-28-2008).]

Why?
It would take all the fun away

keep in mind guys and gals that Yamaha does make 76-key keyboards. You keep forgeting about the DGX series


Lots of neat features and not expensive.

It seems as the folks asking for 76 keys are asking Yamaha to build a Tyros2 with 76 keys, which would entail a complete retooling. This would involve spending huge sums of money for a very small market--it ain't gonna' happen.

Cheers,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

Gary the first arranger I used some 3 plus years ago when I first started playing gigs was the DGX505 with 88 keys very lightweight too. I paid $ about 599. for it in one of the wholesale clubs. The audience never seemed to mind. Despite some neat features it just didn't have enough of them or the flexibility that the more advanced arrangers have.

Not sure I need to go here but will anyway, why is it for $599 they can offer a scaled down arranger( for young piano students possibly) but for $3000. can only offer 61 keys? I know the topic has been beaten to death. Yes retooling is expensive and you're right it ain't going to happen.......


[This message has been edited by Stephenm52 (edited 03-28-2008).]

They re-tool completely for each arranger produced. Is the S900 in a PSR3000 case? No, it is not. Is the Tyros2 in a Tyros1 case..? No, it is not. The case for the arranger is the LEAST expensive thing to develop (compared to the electronics, sound and styles). We don't want a brand new Yamaha arranger, we just want an S900 in a 76 form factor.

Next...

If the G70 and E60 were unsuccessful, but the E50 and E80 WERE, that argument (it's the key size, dummy!) would hold water. Way I hear it, Roland's 61 note arrangers are not much more market successful than the 76's.

Next...

And finally, Yamaha (as pointed out) DO make 76 and 88 note arrangers. They just don't make very good ones. A $500 DGX is no comparison to a $1600 S900. Why do Yamaha think that low-end users need a 76, but NOT high-end ones? Where is the failed Yamaha product that proves their point? I KNOW you don't mean the 9000Pro..!

Next...

Keep setting them up. Tired yet?

Diki...you should read Spalding's and Gary Diamond's posts again.

They make sense...you do not.

Really, I'm surprised you've lasted this far...most people would have seen the light by now...but, then again some are slower than others.

And you're right...the E-80 and E-50 didn't sell well either....Roland hasn't had much luck with any of their arrangers so it can't be a number of keys thingy.

Your roll.

Ian

I think we can agree on those points (although persons who had the T1 and upgraded to the T2 would strongly disagree and claim that the T2 is a completely different keyboard from the T1).


The only thing that is not too right with that point how ever, is that any change to “perfection” would always put Yamaha at risk of potentially turning some customers off. Take for example the T2 had SA voices. The Motif xs (yes I know it is a workstation) tried to improve on those SA voices but it was met with great disappointment. Now the T3 is probably going to try to top the T2’s SA voices. But that is a real risk for Yamaha because they are playing with the heart of the keyboard. They are playing with the reason people by the keyboard. Now making at 76 keyboard would not present that much of a risk because people do not by the Yamaha arranger for the keys.

Diki,

You must be kidding! The cost of creating a mold for an injection-mold plastic mold is beyond your wildest dreams. I've had some experience with this and the cost is astronomical. In my case I wanted to have a 10 cavity mold made for a fishing lure, one that was very easy to make and could be produced at most machine shops in less than a day. The cost, in 1980, was $25,000 for the mold alone. And, the mold was nothing more than an aluminum block measuring 25 inches long with 10 tapered holes and a spruce injection hole at the top of each hole. Nothing complicated, but damned expensive. Today, the same mold would cost more than $100,000 and it's nothing compared with the upper and lower halves of a keyboard shell. I would surmise the cost would be in the millions--and this would just be for the keyboard's shell. The keybed would also have to be retooled, along with dozens of other components. Yep, every manufacturer would want to put out that kind of money for a tiny percentage of their overall market--NOT!

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

They probably do have an explanation but making it public would not be in their best interest because it is probably not a legitimate and a business sound reason. As you can see by these 61 v. 76 key Yamaha arranger discussions there has been no plausible argument put forward for Yamaha not making a 76 key arranger. What company would not want to increase their market with not much risk.

There's nothing wrong with better sounds...that's a win-win situation, and Yamaha's tradition of coming up with stellar sounds has not diminished one iota over the years.

The next generation SA will no doubt give the players big smiles and the competitors big ulcers.


Ian

Oh common Ian...you nippin' the bottle tonight ....just kidding buddy. Unless Yamaha changes alot of things people will fade away from them for sure....lets see their next hand...it not a "given" in this game anymore......

You may want to read through this thread http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/Forum37/HTML/017291.html

Bill

No, not the bottle...just the tea pot...we Capers do love our tea!

Yamaha is always changing, Donny, and their R&D department is wise enough to make the right changes for the target customer AND for the good of the company.

I'm always impressed with each new generation, and I'm sure the next one will be no different.

That's why I love working for them.

Ian

'keep in mind guys and gals that Yamaha does make 76-key keyboards. You keep forgeting about the DGX series

Lots of neat features and not expensive.

It seems as the folks asking for 76 keys are asking Yamaha to build a Tyros2 with 76 keys, which would entail a complete retooling. This would involve spending huge sums of money for a very small market--it ain't gonna' happen.

Cheers,

Gary '


Thats a brilliant example Gary of yamaha understanding its target customers. The DGX series of 'portable grand pianos' are geared to guess which market ? entry level beginner pianist users. It has some arranger functions but it is marketed as a piano. They dont make them in any size less than 76 keys ! Why ?????? Because yamaha have researched the market that this product is aimed at and they dont want a piano with less than 76 keys and they are not going to buy one with less even if its a T2 with SA voices.

End of story.

And ....oh never mind. Diki if you havent got it by now you are just not going to....

[This message has been edited by spalding (edited 03-28-2008).]

They don't make any good ones? Well, perhaps not for your use, but the Yamaha DGX line is very successful as any music dealer will tell you...and that success means profits for both the seller and the manufacturer.

Isn't that what defines a successful product...the right target customer, the right product, and profit?

It was when I studied marketing.

And, you're right...the S900 and DGX aren't comparable...they are for completely different customers, and each of them is selling very well.

Why do YOU think Roland arrangers aren't selling?

There must be a reason.

Ian

I wish Yamaha had the same confidence as you in the sounds and styles like you do.
So let me get this straight.

Yamaha plays around and make changes to the heart of their TOTL arranger (new “SA voices” taking a big risk) that’s OK. But to refuse to implement something that has no effect on the TOTL market they currently have is sound business sense?

Look guise, the reason why the Yamaha apologist have a hard time with explaining themselves is that they seem to ignore one of the most important things. The reason why Yamaha TOTL arrangers are successful and can make a profit is not because of the 61 v. 76 key argument. It is because of the sounds styles (third party styles) and OS. If the T2 were 76 keys that would not have negatively impacted the success of the T2. Did you ever hear a person say the reason why I bought the T2 was because it did not have 76 keys? But you have heard person say I did not buy a T2 because it does not have 76 keys.


To underscore the point, Yamaha changed the keyfeel in the T2 from what was in the T1. Did you hear any one say I will not buy the T2 because of the change in keyfeel from the T1. Get it? The number of keys, the keyfeel and keybed is not a major factor for Yamaha arrangers its all about sounds styles and OS. So having a 76 key TOTL Yamaha arranger would only increase the success and profit for the Yamaha arranger.


[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 03-28-2008).]

I don't feel I am apologizing for Yamaha...I am merely pointing out why they are successful.

They clearly know what works best for them...obviously you don't agree with their strategy, but as you said, "Yamaha TOTL arrangers are successful and can make a profit".

If it is working so well...why try and fix it?

I'm sure if Yamaha felt it would be in their best interest to produce a 76 note TOTL or mid-line arranger, we would see one, but clearly the marketing mavens don't believe it is necessary...at least at present.

Ian

"If it is working so well...why try and fix it?"
I am glad you are finally seeing my point. That is the question I and others, and now you, are asking now that a T3 (an upgrade to the T2) is coming soon.

I don't quite understand your reply...all manufacturers improve on their product with each subsequent model...Korg did so with the PA-800 and Roland made the E-80.

The Tyros3 will, no doubt, have upgrades from the Tyros2...the T2 wasn't perfect(no arranger is)but with new sounds and styles the latest model will surely attract a great following, just like the T2 did, ensuring that Yamaha remains the leader in arranger keyboards.

Ian

Qoute from Genesys

'To underscore the point, Yamaha changed the keyfeel in the T2 from what was in the T1. Did you hear any one say I will not buy the T2 because of the change in keyfeel from the T1. Get it? The number of keys, the keyfeel and keybed is not a major factor for Yamaha arrangers its all about sounds styles and OS. So having a 76 key TOTL Yamaha arranger would only increase the success and profit for the Yamaha arranger.'

You have missed the whole point. The market that the T2 is aimed at (home Market) is not as sensitive to key feel or keybed . However they are sensitive to KEY SIZE and KEYBOARD size! Thats why Yamaha dont move theIr modulation and pitch bend wheel to somewhere else to accomodate the extra keys to limit the size of the board. they dont just throw the instrument together ! The market yamaha are aiming for with their arranger products ARE SENSITIVE TO the position of the pitchbend and modulation wheel. They ARE sensitive to the keyboard size. Yamaha dont make masive adjustments to the keyboard because the market would respond adversly to it. Thats why the OS system stays basically the same through the range. There is a yamaha way which its customers like just as there is a korg way and roland way which their customers prefer.

Does that make sense ?

Another Qoute from Genesys

"If it is working so well...why try and fix it?"
I am glad you are finally seeing my point. That is the question I and others, and now you, are asking now that a T3 (an upgrade to the T2) is coming soon.'

I thought i had explained the magic of making profit before Genesys ? Product life cycle, sales saturation, tweak the product, sell it as a new product again, start the product cycle again etc...

Which part of that strategy did you not agree with ? You can identify it in every product ever made because i promise you every manufacturer does it. And whats more Yamaha plan the release of their new products based upon that sales cycle strategy,AND NOT ON ANY TECHNOLOGICAL BREAK THROUGH. They time the release on the next upgrade based upon that same formula regardless as to when they could have released the new product.

Thats how the magic works. Tjhats how you maxim ise profits. Korgs sales cylce is different in its duration but the pattern is EXACTLY the same.Yamaha does it better than most because they understand their market better than most. It really doesnt matter if you or i or anybody else doesnt. They most certainly do.

It doesnt matter if you dont agree with what i have posted. Thats cool. We have nothing to lose with our friendly banter. But i have to b honest with you , i do get a little frustatrated when people in business dont understand marketing.

There is at least one company i know that doesnt get marketing at all and wastes its time making products that are certainly not suited to arranger players but marketed to arranger players as one and sells itself not based upon great professional styles and sounds which are crusial to arranger players whether pro or homebased but on technology that its target market (arranger players) dont even know how to use let alone wants !

This company puts out both 76 and 88 key versions of something nobody wants !!!

so for you and i this is just a fun discussion. I respect your stance but i am right :-)

I am out of this one now. Cheers

Spalding

[This message has been edited by spalding (edited 03-29-2008).]

[This message has been edited by spalding (edited 03-29-2008).]

[This message has been edited by spalding (edited 03-29-2008).]

This was fun discussing but we are going around in circles with a lot of assumptions being made about Yamaha’s market.

Assuming that the market does not care about keyfeel and keybed but mysteriously cares about 76 v. 61 would not get us any where and help the apologist understand how a 76 key TOTL arranger would be beneficial not detrimental to Yamaha.

In one breath, they would want to say making a 76 key TOTL arranger would interfere with the proven formula that has been working. But in the other breath they contradict them selves and say it is good to change the proven formula that has been working as it relates to sounds and styles.

So to save internet space, I will end my discussion on this topic.

That's exactly the point.

I have some info that might just convince some of the naysayers regarding 76 vs. 61 keys and why Yamaha chooses (unjustifiably so in my opinion) not to make the former i.e. "76 keys" on their high-end arranger line.

For my illustration I am going to use workstation figures for Roland's new Fantom G flagship. Roland officially released the Fantom G just days ago in Japan with shipments of the Fantom G to the U.S. and abroad starting soon. Roland is confident that the new Fantom G will hit a projected sales mark for the first year of 10,000 for the G6 (61 keys), 7,000 for the G7 (76 keys) and also 7,000 for the G8 (88 keys). Here is the url for the statistics if you would like to look for yourself: Fantom G released! >> After you get to the page you will then have to use a translator site to translate the url page. Google language tools is a relatively good one for translating japanese into english, which can be found here: Google Language Tools PS: For PC users you will most likely have to have the japanese language pack from Microsoft installed to view the page properly.

Notice if you will that the biggest seller in the G line will be the Fantom G6 (61 keys), at least in the first year anyway. No surprise really because it is a well established fact that 61 key keyboards are the biggest seller for those manufacturers that make a 61 key version in their product lines. One of the biggest reasons 61 key boards sell the best is because it is also a well established fact that they are the least expensive of the bunch. If people can get all the features and sounds of the extended range keyboards at a cheaper price many times they will opt for the cheaper 61 key alternative obviously. Money doesn't grow on trees as we know and a good segment of these 61 keyers are younger dudes who don't necessarily have the resources to buy the more expensive extended 76 and 88 key options. Next in line is the Fantom G7 (76 keys) which will boast a projected sales of 7,000 units. Seven thousand Fantom G 76 key units selling in the first year is nothing to shake a stick at and most likely Roland will have turned a nice profit within the first year of selling the Fantom G7 (76 keys), recovering all R&D and other associated costs by then. And since a product line usually lasts 3 to 4 years Roland is expecting the Fantom G line i.e. G6, G7, and G8, to eventually outsell the previous generation Fantom X line thus making the Fantom G Rolands most successful workstation ever. And finally... pay particular attention to the Fantom G8 (88 keys) which also has a sales projection identical to the Fantom G7 (76 keys) with a projected sales of 7,000 units according to Roland.

My point is: If 76 key keyboards are such financial losers for manufacturers why then doesn't Roland also quit making the 88 key version as well?? Since the 88 key Fantom G8 has the same projected sales figure as the smaller 76 key version why then does Roland continue to make either one of them for that matter i.e. 76 or 88 key?? I'll tell you why my friends, it is because they "both" make a handsome profit for Roland and company. You may think it unthinkable if Roland were to actually quit selling the full sized 88 key versions of their workstations because true pianists must have 88 keys. Yet the 88 key version of the Fantom G does no better in overall sales than the 76 key Fantom G. If Roland can turn a handsome profit on the 88 and also the 76 key Fantom G could Yamaha expect anything less?? Especially since the Yamaha name has greater worldwide recognition compared to all of their competitors and also has a much greater market following?? Do you get my point?? Of course Yamaha 'could' make a HUGE profit on a 76 key high-end arranger if they indeed attempted such a "scary" scenario once again!! Scary in their eyes maybe; but as the old addage testifies to: "Nothing Ventured Nothing GAINED!" And furthermore: Failure i.e. (PSR 9000PRO) is the Backdoor to "success" i.e. 76 key Tyros"4" - since we already know that the Tyros3 will be 'lacking' those extra 15 keys.

Hey... if Yammie doesn't want to risk making a 76 key high-end arranger again that is up to them. Myself and others are just poking holes in these (excuse my french) "lame" excuses as to why they don't.

>> Now I know why Ian was sent here among us by Yammie central. Besides espousing his employers products, which is fine and dandy and I have no qualms with him doing so by the way, - his main imperative from Yamaha is to try and convince us that 76 keys are evil in Yamaha's high end arranger marketing scheme of things and a foreboding token of what lies ahead for Yamaha apparently . His main nemesis though, being Diki and others like myself, won't bend to Yamaha's will and way of thinking and as a matter of fact, we the consumer, are just trying to give Yamaha a much needed wake up call with our objective opinions and insight and we only do it because we actually and truthfully want Yamaha to thrive as a company, and more importantly, to simply offer the same options that all of their competitors currently do. We keep beating this apparent dead horse in hopes that this apparent dead horse will eventually feel the pain and prodding and wake up from its unconcious state of mind and once again become "alive" and start living outside the tepid, tip toeing scary box it finds itself currently in. At least that's the image I get when listening to our beloved Ian. [img]http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/wink.gif[/img]

Best,
Mike

[This message has been edited by keybplayer (edited 03-31-2008).]

Yamaha clearly know what works best for them...obviously you don't agree to their tactics, Mike, but that's okay...I'm sure no one going to lose sleep over it.

Ian

Hi Mike
Yamaha do make 61, 76 and 88 mote Workstations just like the Roland Fantoms, however we are talking Arrangers, which are a completely separate line of instruments. (As well as a separate market)
Regards

Bill

Look, maybe we can put and end to this nonsense. NO-ONE posting here (including Ian) has the slightest clue why Yamaha chose not to participate in this profitable market segment. NO-ONE. Opinions offered by the 'naysayers' are as uninformed as the rest of us. You are all just guessing. Your philosophy of 'my company/religion/choice of brand is the market leader, therefore ALL their decisions MUST be correct is as absurd as your position that your friends (or whatever you think of us) here have gone delusional in thinking that Yamaha COULD make money in this segment.

You have no more FACTS to back you up than we do. In fact you have no facts at all (other than the fact that Yamaha don't make a 76 PSR). Just idle conjecture. We, on the other hand, DO have the fact that every single other manufacturer DOES make a profit on a quality 76 arranger.

But, in looking at the whole thing, I think something Ian guessed at a while back is probably the TRUE reason Yamaha chose not to make this product. Divisional rivalry. Yamaha want to keep the DGX line afloat, and making a 76 S900 would go a LONG way to killing that off. Roland and Korg don't have the same fractured divisional structure, so are able to produce the product without treading on any divisional toes.

Now, whether this is a 'good decision' because it basically has no relation to the marketplace, only to intra-corporate relations and rivalries is debatable. But it is quite easy to see, under these circumstances, that it has nothing to do with whether the product itself is needed or would be profitable. The decision is being made to preserve divisional and organizational differences in a large corporation.

The idea that if a company dominates sales in ONE area, then all their decisions in OTHER areas MUST be right is absurd. If Ford make a great compact, and dominate the market, does that make any decision they make about the luxury car market automatically correct? No, it does not (as demonstrated by just about every corporation that works diverse markets). Success at ONE thing does not bestow prescience about anything else. This decision is NOT being made out of any knowledge about the market (Yamaha obviously know by now there's a demand for the product!). It is being made to preserve the fiefdom of some corporate manager of a rival division. If that's good enough for YOU, have at it! It doesn't strike me as a 'good' decision, just a pragmatic one.

But what is good for Yamaha's corporate structure is NOT necessarily good for the arranger users. For all the posturing, it has been fairly obvious from the poll and discussion that there is a fairly high demand for the product, despite what the status quo defenders would have you believe. The reason that things got a bit crazy round here has mostly come from having to listen to die hard Yamaha fanatics (sorry, guys, but little you have said now or in the past give any credibility to your 'my company right or wrong' attitude) jump through hoops to try and explain something that ONLY makes sense to a corporate manager, not an arranger player.

There IS a high demand for the product, it WOULD make a handsome profit, it WOULD put strong pressure on the success of it's competitors products. All worthy goals. But it isn't being produced to preserve a corporate divisional structure. And that, my friends, does NOT constitute a 'good reason' in MY book.

'My corporation, right or wrong'...? OK, then. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

You're only guessing there is a high demand for the product...if there was, Yamaha would be making a 76 note arranger.

If you can't comprehend Yamaha's approach to this situation, that's okay....a few others do not as well...but the fact remains the company does what is best for itself.

Ian

Good points by all. However, we can't assume that 'might makes right'. Because a company is very large doesn't always mean that all of their marketing (and general business) decisions are correct. Remember IBM and Dos (Bill Gates does ). Or, how about GM and Ford and Chrysler....oh yeah, and Toyota and Honda. Sometimes, product success is a fleeting thing. Let's hope Yamaha doesn't ending up having to sell off it's motorcycle division to keep it's 61 key arrangers afloat .

chas

The poll is mostly hypothetical...how many pollsters would be prepared to really ACTUALLY buy an new arranger in first place?

Talk is cheap.

AND...the poll didn't figure in the ones who would not buy a Yamaha arranger no matter how many keys it had.

If you took the total of who wanted 76 keys, and factored in those who are brand loyal to Roland, Korg and others, the number grows less.

Yamaha has more accurate ways of reading the market...their success is the proof...what more do you need?

The slice of the 76-note arranger pie obviously just isn't big enough at present.


Ian

As I pointed out earlier, we (Synthzone forum members) constitute a tiny fraction of the overall consumers. As a good friend once said "It's kinda' like pissin' in the ocean and expecting the tide to rise--it ain't gonna happen!"

Cheers,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

Sad fact is, Gary and Ian... Until the poll, you were touting NO potential customers. As politics are showing, there's nothing more more pathetic than a zealot that cannot recognize when the figures don't agree with your world view.

A small, but significant percentage of this, the forum that you believe represents a small proportion of all arranger users, extrapolates into a MUCH larger figure... In fact, the very figure that every arranger manufacturer OTHER than Yamaha is making a profit from right now.

You know, if the majority of SZ members somehow came on board, and Ian and Gary weren't the only ones putting a good show on for their favorites, I might be swayed. But, after all, we are democratic, here in the West. If you can't come up with the numbers, you can't win (unless we in Florida decide to recount your vote!) no matter how many times you come up with absurd apologia...

The facts are... there IS a demand for the product. And Yamaha refuse to make the product for reasons that have NOTHING to do with demand, feasibility or profitability (every other manufacturer already knows this). No other reason than corporate divisional rivalry makes any sense in the light of the facts.

Unless, of course, you are blinded by zealotry. Me, I've got NO stakes in the discourse, other than disgust at the spinelessness of Yamaha to sate a proven market need for the sake of corporate divisional tactics. Yamaha zealots, on the other hand, seem hell bent to come up with ANY absurd answer, I guess to compensate for the fact that they can't think of anything more realistic than 'They don't do it, therefore it MUST be right'...

Sorry, guys, but other than the existence of our Lord, I need better arguments than that. Yamaha is not MY religion...

Go into any Yamaha or Independent music dealer anywhere in the world, and they will all give you the same information. “There is no demand for a Yamaha 76 Note Arranger”

Bill

I was going to stay out of this discussion but i couldnt let Diki'S point go. Do the numbers from this poll represent what people in the real world would do ?

do you really believe that Diki ?

What proportion of people who frequent this site as members actually cared enough to vote? And of the people who voted how many actually use their arranger for a living or on a semi commercial basis ? What proportion use their instrument at home only ? Analsye the poll Diki ! Thats what a serious business would do......

Now look at the real market. In your own mind Diki are you confident that the proportion of users that voted for a 76 key version would be replicated out there amongst the buying public ? What proportion of users in the real world are gigging musicians and which are home users? Which market do you think makes the most money for yamaha ?

I keep saying this. Yamaha KNOW THEIR CUSTOMERS AND THEIR MARKET. The inter departmentental competition between yamaha' arranger lines and its DGX line and their pro instruments are only one of numerous reasons yamaha dont feel the need to enter the very small 76 key arranger market. Thier product range is highly segmented and targeted. Alright. Now i am done

No offense, Spalding, but you are as much in the dark as anyone else.

Have YOU got any other figures for us to look at?

It might have been unscientific, but at least it wasn't conjecture. The question was asked, the responses came in. Do your own poll. Come up with contradictory figures. Or for God's sake, accept the truth... Like I said, nothing more pathetic that someone that refuses to acknowledge facts that don't agree with your world view.

This moronic faith in corporate decisions, despite overwhelming (like I said, PROVE US WRONG) evidence to the contrary, is a little disturbing... Is there anything in the recent behavior of large corporations that leads you to expect rationality and a respect for actual customer NEEDS? Anti-competitive behavior, and corporate greed and malfeasance seem more the rule than the exception these days.

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 04-01-2008).]

not all Diki. i know that this forums active user population does not represent the market. I believe you do too....

'This moronic faith in corporate decisions, despite overwhelming (like I said, PROVE US WRONG) evidence to the contrary, is a little disturbing... Is there anything in the recent behavior of large corporations that leads you to expect rationality and a respect for actual customer NEEDS? Anti-competitive behavior, and corporate greed and malfeasance seem more the rule than the exception these days.'

You just prove my point Diki. Corporate behaviour is driven by one thing only....profit. I have no faith if (thats the right word) in any company. I have no loyalty to Yamaha or any company. If Yamaha have got it wrong in this issue then they have got it wrong in a profitable way. If they could make more profit i am sure they will consider it soon enough.Maybe your right, who knows ? But i understand the fundemental drivers of all profitable business Diki. Give them a vehicle to make a net increase in their profits and they will take it.

And please dont describe my understanding of business principles as 'moronic'whther they are applied to yamaha's marketing strageies or any other business. You dont know anything about my back ground or experience. I would not and have not been disrespectful to you. Its a discussion.We debate,we question and sometimes we agree on things as i have with you in the past, sometimes we disagree. Lets just keep it that way. If i have offended you in some way with my posts i apologise. It was not meant to offend.

[This message has been edited by spalding (edited 04-01-2008).]

Actually, I DO believe, for better or worse, that we DO represent the market, at least the portion of the market that has any opinion at all (where do the 'rest of the market' post?).

And, fortunately for me, and a LARGE percentage of the rest of SZ, so do Roland, Korg, Ketron, Wersi, Lionstracs, Bohm and Casio (did I miss anybody?). So, on behalf of all these other players in the market (scoff all you like, they ALL are making a profit form a segment of the market Yamaha CAN'T), I would like to thank Yamaha for not having the cojones to try to compete.

At least it spares Ian from the embarrassment of me detailing exhaustively (like I have for Roland) all the flaws in THEIR OS as well..

Trust me, I would find them!

double post. sorry

[This message has been edited by spalding (edited 04-01-2008).]

Spalding, the only thing that offends me is the 'faith' in corporate decisions. Moronic is only the politest term I could come up with THAT concept, in the face of the last few years of unremittingly bad decision making from the corporate sector. You can't POSSIBLY be trying to tell me that ALL corporate decisions are driven entirely by the market...

As far as I can see, corporate decisions are driven by what best profits the corporate officers, not the shareholders or the public (or the country that shelters them and makes their profits possible).

I see your argument, particularly as you have no better information about Yamaha's market research or intra-divisional agreements than any of the rest of us, as a blanket trust in the power of the market and the infallibility of the corporate structure. Which the failures of many large corporations (does the current sub-prime meltdown speak well for long-term corporate decision making?) completely refutes.

The truth is, especially in our age of deregulation and emasculation of anti-trust and anti-competitive statutes, the concept of a free market and transparent competition between market forces is a joke. Dominating a market (which, in truth, Yamaha only dominate a SEGMENT of the arranger market, so you can't truthfully even say that Yamaha IS the market leader, only in the one area that they chose to compete in) is often achieved by RESTRICTING competition, and by anti-competitive measures, rather than by simple market forces.

But, in fact, you have only to admit to yourself that the last time you said ANYTHING bad about ANY corporation's tactics, methods, decisions or direction is all the proof we need. Let's face it, if ANY corporation could be wrong, then Yamaha could be, too... All you have is faith.

But if no corporation could EVER be wrong... Then God help us all.

It is ironic, but the only thing that could persuade me to use a current Yamaha arranger...would be an improved 9000 Pro..Am I the only one here that thought it was their only professional arranger..A keybed that was playable, and sturdy construction, and 76 keys to boot...and no stupid speakers that can not be utilized in a real performing venue..[non home use]..

And it didn't seem like it came from a toy store..

All Yamaha had to do..was support it correctly with updates..It was not a winner, because Yamaha chose to make it fail..Tells me just how smart Yamaha is..right..

Well, I DON'T agree that SZ does represent the market...and I can tell that you don't seem to grasp the basic principals of good business....but that's okay,...I still respect your opinions even if they are wrong.

Yamaha has the easiest to use OS, and that is only part of their success...the rest is because of their brilliant marketing.

AND...we must not forget the the excellent third party support...it is light years ahead of the competitors.


Roland arranger sales have been dismal...according to salespeople it is because they aren't user friendly out of the box, and the OS is considered tough to navigate...critical flaws in my opinion...and exacerbated by Roland's inability and/or lack of interest in correcting them.

Two of the prominent G-70 OS blunders; the ACC cutting off on Chord Type changes; the Style EQ values not getting recorded in the Sequencer and Recorder, still have not been addressed in spite of insistent complaints on Roland Arranger forum by you and others.

IF Yamaha has any OS flaws, they aren't in any way interfering with the target user's enjoyment, something I can personally attest to from doing many clinics.

Roland's only hope is to bring out a TOTL arranger that can successfully compete with Yamaha and Korg...and potential customers should also hope the glaring OS problems associated with the G70 are fixed so that they don't turn up in the next G-series.


BTW...the rest of the market post on the manufacturer's user forums....these provide a much better and more accurate indication of how an instrument is received.

Ian

'But, in fact, you have only to admit to yourself that the last time you said ANYTHING bad about ANY corporation's tactics, methods, decisions or direction is all the proof we need. Let's face it, if ANY corporation could be wrong, then Yamaha could be, too... All you have is faith.'

What planet do you live on ?? Where do you get your information ? When was the last time i said anything bad about a corporation ??? Do you work for the FBI or something !!!

I make no value judgement on how corporations operate whether good or bad. I just comment on how they operate. You really should not comment on my beliefs unless i tell you them first. And i really think it unwise to bring into the discussion other corporate decisons that again were profit motivated (for good or bad) to support your argument. If we are struggling to reach an understanding on very basic business and marketing principles there is no way we are going to agree on what is going on with subprime mortgages and the resale value of internbank debt trading.

I respect your opinion diki but i cant agree with it not because of my faith or lack of faith in corporations. Just my understanding of business and marketing which is something i do know about both in theory and practise.

'All Yamaha had to do..was support it correctly with updates..It was not a winner, because Yamaha chose to make it fail..Tells me just how smart Yamaha is..right.'

please Fran not you too.... :-)

So yamaha employ designers, spend thousands on R&D marketing, setting up distribution networks providing warranties etc for products that they actually want to fail .....

amazing.

Boy, I really didn't think you had such an inaccurate view of how a company works...but, I guess I was wrong.

Of course, the way you constantly bash Yamaha, I guess ANY form of criticism is sufficient, even though it is based on conjecture, supposition and downright hooey.

Come on, Fran...you can do better than that.

Ian

o.K. I know I said I was going to not post in this thread but too many erroneous ideas have been going around.

I am amazed that the Yamaha apologist who are saying that every thing that Yamaha does is perfect in every thing but do not want to admit that the 9000 pro was a failure and Yamaha had a part to play in its failure.

Obviously, Yamaha saw a need for a 76 key arranger. But it was not done well and for reasons other than it being 76 keys it was not doing well in sales and Yamaha abandon it.

I suspect that since it had some workstation features and since it had expansion slots like the workstation, divisional rivalry probably stared Yamaha in abandoning the 9000 pro.


P.s A business decision that is made only for the good of the company and not what the consumers/market want (as the Yamaha apologist state is the reason for Yamaha not making a 76 key arranger) is not a right or good decision. It is just a tactical one.

As this discussion has shown, a 76 key arranger would not hurt Yamaha it would only help them to dominate the arranger market even more. But for strategic purposes, Yamaha chooses not to make one at this time. Because as everyone knows Yamaha would do just as well and even better with a 76 key arranger since number of keys is not the reason people buy the Yamaha arranger.

This discussion has shown nothing of the sort...and, who is "everyone"?

Speak for yourself...I don't agree with you, so please don't include me in your hypothesis.

Ian

bashing Yamaha!!!!!!!!!
read..I actually liked the 9000Pro..and yes they definitely bailed out..on their customers..Ask any 9000Pro owner..Start with Jim Esch...

And this is not an April Fools remark..

With the 9000Pro they were on the right path..the rest of the Yamaha product[arrangers] are "all" geared towards the home player market...period..

As for pro models [and they do make them]..Korg PA2x, Roland G70, Ketron SD1 and MediaStation...what do they all have in common?
76keys and no speakers...

Yes, and they are all home keyboards...anything with single finger chords is a home keyboard in my opinion.

Ian

Ian, if you can't tell the difference between the "pro" arrangers I mentioned and the typical "home" arranger........I rest my case....There is an easily distinguishable difference..

A person would only have to play the keys, lift it up, or look for the output jacks..that are needed for PA connection..Also the higher quality features are obvious...

Surly ..you do notice the differences...You are just kidding us...Right?

If your interpretation of a "home" board is a single finger "option"..you are far off base..I will bet you..just about all who play the"pro" keyboards I mentioned ..do not play single finger recognition mode...

The vast majority of PSR/Tyros most likely do......"Home keyboards"..

Doesn't matter if they don't play single finger chords...lots of amateurs/home players don't play them either...but many do.

Why is single finger chord on these instruments at all if they are "pro" boards?

That is a "beginner" feature.

My old '63 Ford has "Custom" on the fender...does that make it a custom car?

Of course not.

Just because an instrument has "pro" printed on it doesn't make it "pro"....it's just the same old home keyboard in a different cabinet...and upgraded features/hardware...that's all.


Clever marketing, to be sure....they fooled you! Tsk tsk!

Ian

Ian, you are really clueless...

And you aren't?

You're the one who bought the G70 thinking it was a pro keyboard.

Tsk tsk, I say again.

Are you sure the nurses know you're using the computer?

Ian the Home Keyboard Player...and proud of it.